Signing a CB and the defensive sheme (1 Viewer)

[St. PJ]

Most of us salivitate and yearn for the Saints to make a big splash and maybe sign a big name CB free agent like Asante Samuels. I asked Randy Cross and Bob Papa what they thought about such a move and their response was that the Saints play a lot of man coverage, are a predominately man coverage team, and that that is not Samuels stregnth. He said our scheme would be better fit with someone like Asomugha from Oakland. Granted, Randy Cross was an offensive lineman, and this opinion would be more highly values coming from someone like Solomon Wilcox who played the position, but it is a fair point.

What is obvious is that CB is not the only need on defense. We could use two more starters at LB, an additonal CB, a DT, and some safeties who understand the term safety and don't constantly play out of position. I also believe we play the scheme that we play based on the personel that we have-- which wasn't much to work with and in all likelyhood we have very little choice as to which scheme we employ if we don't have the horses. My question is for those with a more intimate knowledge of the game, who know the X's and O's better than I do. Simply put, If we signed a top tier LB and CB, and upgraded at safety, or if we went in to the offseason with the plan to do so, would it not be easier to get the talent and develop a new scheme with the talent we aquire should they be more versatile as opposed to pigeon holeing players to play in a scheme we never really had the players to play to begin with?

 

[Pickz]

That's why its Gibbs job to change the scheme of our D because its obvious that our players we have now don't do good in his scheme.

 

[St. PJ]

I am not sure that that is the best answer as to why we fail. As is, we don't have the personel to play a lot of zone coverage. The skills of or LB's and S's do not fit that. Also, Mike Mckenzie, our only bonafide DB, is predominatly a man coverage CB. What hurt his is when the NFL changed the rules after the Colts vs Pats championship game a few years back, implementing that 5 yd rule. MM made his money being physical with WR's. I digress though. The point is, with the talent we have, or lack of it, the scheme that we do run is the only one we can use with the roster we currently have. If you think we looked totally awful and absurd, I assure you it would be much worse trying to run a 3-4 or cover two. It would be like trying to make a square peg fit in a round hole.

Becuase we meeked by last year, and the band of overacheivers did just that, our defense looked to be missing just a few peices to a casual observer. The fact of the matter is we lack true talent at almost every position on defense. Our defense is like Minnesota's WR corp: Occasionally someone makes a play becuase the coaches have the players in the right position, but we don't have a stud who can make a play on his own and the lack of talent gets exposed when we play against a well coached team or a team with talent. Hell, it even gets exposed vs no names QB's like Matt Moore and Chris Redman.

The success that we have had on defense can be directly attributed to Gibbs. because he has had these guys over acheive in spite of the lack of talent, not becuase of the talent we so abundantly have on that side.

 

[St. PJ]

That's why its Gibbs job to change the scheme of our D because its obvious that our players we have now don't do good in his scheme.

Blaming Gibbs or his scheme would be like blaming Brad Childress for Minnesota's lack of a passing attack or Norm Chow for Tennessee's lack of passing attack. The best offensive strategy these guys can use is to run the ball and pass the least amount of times they can get away with. Much the same is how and why Gibbs runs the man coverage we run in our 43. We don't have a Jamal Williams at DT or LB's and DE's versatile enough to play a 34. We don't have the speed necessary at LB, or the versatility at DB to play cover 2, so you see, back to the original poin, Gibbs is doing the only thing he can with the players he has to work with.

The original question is, because of the discrepancy of talent we have a various positons, do you think it would benefit us more to go after players that better fit a different scheme and try to aqquire the critical peices needed to change a scheme, or would it be best to limit or offseason aquisitions to players who fit the scheme we do have and target those only?

 

[NJDevilSaints]

We won't be able to bring in enough players this offseason to allow us to change our scheme outright. Even if we bring in new starters at MLB, DT, CB, and FS (I'll be happy even with new starters at 2 or 3 of those), it will still be too radical of a change to go from, say, a 4-3 to a 3-4 or man coverage to mostly Cover 2 (even though we run some now). We have an offense ready to win a championship, waiting 2 more years to fully overhaul our defense is something we cannot afford.

However, bringing in some upgrades will allow us to tweak the scheme we currently run (more stunts, all-out blitzes, CB/S blitzes, etc.).

 

[St. PJ]

We won't be able to bring in enough players this offseason to allow us to change our scheme outright. Even if we bring in new starters at MLB, DT, CB, and FS (I'll be happy even with new starters at 2 or 3 of those), it will still be too radical of a change to go from, say, a 4-3 to a 3-4 or man coverage to mostly Cover 2 (even though we run some now). We have an offense ready to win a championship, waiting 2 more years to fully overhaul our defense is something we cannot afford.

However, bringing in some upgrades will allow us to tweak the scheme we currently run (more stunts, all-out blitzes, CB/S blitzes, etc.).

I agree that changing specifically to a 34 or a cover 2 is too drastic and would take 3 to 4 years as seen in Dallas (3-4 from Parcells) and Indy (cover 2 Dungy). What I am more interested in is instead of saying Samuels stregnths aren't suitable or best used in man coverage, where in a 43 does a player like him fit in, and being that we desperately need help at S and LB, would it be easier to target guys that fit that kind of 4-3 scheme as opposed to sticking with a man coverage scheme. It seems the only person with the right skills to play in our scheme that we currently have is Mike Mckenzie and maybe our defensive ends. Considering our areas of need, and the amount of time it will take to build or defense to respectability, would you just try to upgrade our scheme with second tier players and hope we can outscore opponets and come op with an occasional stop, or would it be better to try and sign top tiered, more versatile players and transition to a different varition of 4-3 based on that talent?

I guess what I am looking for is someone to say " if were able to sign players in the mold of xxxx and xxxx at these positions, it would be pluasible for us do change our defensive scheme becuase looking at these guys - xxxx xxxx available this offeseason, it could happen OR if we targeted these players who might not have the household name label, players like xxxx xxxxx, who would fit in our scheme, or defense would be greatly improved without having to change the scheme- they would allow us to run the scheme as it is designed and add wrinkles and maybe one day dictate what opposing offenses can do. Which scenario is more likely, and which is easier considering the players we have and the players available and what salary cap we have considering who we may need to resign like Colston and Smith.

 

[BoNcHiE]

We have an offense ready to win a championship, waiting 2 more years to fully overhaul our defense is something we cannot afford.

Why not? Bush, Deuce, Colston, Brees, Brown, Meachem, and Karney will all still be here in 2 years. Our window is huge. We will have one of the best offenses in the league for the next 5-6 years barring an injury to Brees. We can keep trying to win with mediocre defenses or we can start the process of rebuilding the D. Everyone wants to win now. Its been 42 years. We can wait 2 more years if it means finally having a championship team. Or we can hope to get lucky at 9-7, 10-6 continually instead of for once having a truly dominant team. Predominantly zone defeses are the way of the future and the best cure for our worst weakness, big plays. We've tried to run a base 4-3 man defense for a long time now while the top defenses are all running 4-3 cover 2's or 3-4 variants of it. Time to change even if it means 2 years of growing pains while we draft/sign the players we need.

 

[Capn_Morgan]

I don't think we have enough good players to be locked in to a scheme. We're looking to replace pretty much every starter in our back 7 not named Fujita. We don't have the players currently to play cover 2. Of course, we don't have the players currently to play man either.

 

[St. PJ]

I don't think we have enough good players to be locked in to a scheme. We're looking to replace pretty much every starter in our back 7 not named Fujita. We don't have the players currently to play cover 2. Of course, we don't have the players currently to play man either.

In just a very short paragraph, you made the point or basis for my argument. I wish I could have said it as efficiently as you have.

 

[BoNcHiE]

I don't think we have enough good players to be locked in to a scheme. We're looking to replace pretty much every starter in our back 7 not named Fujita. We don't have the players currently to play cover 2. Of course, we don't have the players currently to play man either.

We don't have the players to be good at anything (like you said) so instead of trying to plug holes in a flawed system, I think its time to pick a proven winner like the cover 2 base, especially considering we've not been able to cure our big play problem for years now.

Look at SF. They have everything we say we need. Great LB's, 2 of the best corners in the league, good D-line, decent safties. And they can't crack the top 25 in total defense with their man scheme.

 

[Jackavelli]

just watching the garcia interception and how webster turned his head to look for the ball, we need db's that do that

 

[St. PJ]

just watching the garcia interception and how webster turned his head to look for the ball, we need db's that do that

That is very true, but ever since NY drafted Webster, fans have been calling of his head. I listen to Sirius every day and most fans think Webster is lacking or has lost his confidence and is not reliable. Maybe Webster has turned a corner and it has finally clicked for him, but the majority of CB's take a few years to get good. It is almost like QB in that if you get thrown into the fire with little help around you as a rookie, your confidence can be shot and you can be jaded for the rest of your career.

 

[NJDevilSaints]

We don't have the players to be good at anything (like you said) so instead of trying to plug holes in a flawed system, I think its time to pick a proven winner like the cover 2 base, especially considering we've not been able to cure our big play problem for years now.

Look at SF. They have everything we say we need. Great LB's, 2 of the best corners in the league, good D-line, decent safties. And they can't crack the top 25 in total defense with their man scheme.

The 4-3 man has been a proven winner and the 3-4 has been a proven winner as well. It's not that we can't win with the 4-3 man. There's no one scheme that has repeatedly failed in league history. It's not the scheme that needs changing, it's finding players as well as making the appropriate tweaks. I'm not saying our defense is perfectly designed, far from it, but while switching to a Cover 2 may work, I don't think it's the only way.

Also, SF runs a 3-4, so it's slightly different, and a lot of those good pieces are very new.

 

[sykobob671]

We do pretty well against the run and very poorly against the pass.....establishing a good pass rush is tantamount to getting the Saint's back in the post season....way,way to much pressure is being applied to the secondary by the lack of a consistent pass rush.
I tend to think of fixing secondaries with our problems from the back forward. Take the pressure off the CB's with the best SS,FS you can find.
Remove the big plays on runs with good LB's allowing the line to concentrate more on the pass rush.A good pass rush relieves the pressure on the CB's. Good SS and FS players allow for some intricate blitzing packages...etc. JMHO...better ideas are most welcome...

 

[meily]

I agree with you Bonchie, we obviously don't have a good system (whatever it is) so why not adopt one, we see the trend in the NFL is the cover 2 or 3-4, or whatever defense NY and Phili run ( NY adopted the Eagles Defense), but if Gibbs defense is a Man to Man defense, then why hasn't the Corner position been emphasized?